SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 Evidence at Your Fingertips Series Cash Transfer Timing: How Transfer Duration and Frequency Contribute to Outcomes Summary 1. Studies from 2016 on demonstrate that the impact 3. Longer duration of transfers allows for of cash transfers varies based on duration, households to plan for the future, which depending on whether they are distributed over in turn allows households to engage in riskier yet a short (24 months or less) or long (more than more-profitable income-generating activities, when 24 months) period. available. Longer duration of transfers, such as 2. Cash transfers distributed over a long period through universal basic income experiments, may provide predictability that is associated with especially benefit children when timed to pivotal greater impact, particularly with transfers distributed developmental periods such as the first 1,000 days to improve children’s health, nutrition and education, of life and employment and labor. Therefore, policy makers 4. Evidence suggests that frequency of cash and implementers should consider duration as disbursements alone does not significantly an influential factor, especially for smaller, more- affect outcomes such as health, nutrition and frequent transfers (e.g., monthly or quarterly cash- food security, saving and investment, education, or transfer programs). gender-based violence. One-time transfers may be SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 more appealing to policy makers and implementers 5. The confluence of size, frequency, and duration given lower costs and greater ease of implementation, of cash transfers may produce different with a caveat that other factors, including beneficiary results than any single factor in isolation. For perspectives (e.g., financial situation, literacy), must be example, frequency combined with size (or value) of considered. disbursements may have specific gender impacts, such as women’s ability to control cash, but more-rigorous evidence is needed. Evidence Overview This review found a limited selection of studies since security, mental health and psychosocial well-being, 2016 on timing of cash transfers, namely duration and education, and labor and employment. Five studies frequency, but evidence on duration underscores robust review impacts of long duration (defined as more than findings from earlier studies. Table 1, examining duration, 24  months for this review), and two compare one-time includes six studies focused on health, nutrition and food and short- and long-duration transfers together. Table 1: Overview of Included Studies: Duration Country Program Scope of comparison Food Health Mental Education Labor and security and health and employment nutrition psychosocial well-being 7 countries SSA National Long duration: 10+ in Africa Cash Transfers months         X United Alaska Long duration [lifetime]         X States Permanent Fund vs synthetic control Mexico Progresa Long duration [childhood: from 1,000 days vs from primary to   X   X X secondary transition] United North Carolina Long duration [lifetime States American Indian and children’s fund: aged Casino Cash 16 for 2 years vs aged     X X X Transfer 14 for 4 years vs aged 12 for 6 years] Kenya Universal Basic One-time vs short vs Income- COVID long duration [once vs 2 years vs 2 years out of X X X   X 12 years anticipated]) Rwanda Give Directly and One-time vs short Catholic Relief duration [once vs X X       12 months] Sources: Avitabile 2019; Banerjee et al. 2020; Caridad Araujo and Macours 2021; Copeland et al. 2022; Daidone 2019; Jones and Marinescu 2022; McIntosh and Zeitlin 2021. -2- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 Table 2, examining frequency, includes six studies lumpsum cash transfer with monthly payments, one focused on health, nutrition, and food security; savings, compares a lumpsum payment with weekly payments, investment, and consumption; education, labor, and and one compares monthly and quarterly payments. employment; and gender. Four studies compare a Table 2: Overview of Included Studies: Frequency Country Program Scope of Outcome comparison Food Health Education Labor and Savings and Consumption Gender security and employment investments equity and nutrition empowerment Brazil Bolsa Familia (Monthly vs & Maternity lumpsum)   X     X   X Wage Nigeria Feed the (Monthly vs Future quarterly) Nigeria X X   X X X X Livelihoods Project Kenya GiveDirectly (Monthly vs lumpsum) X X     X     Kenya GiveDirectly (Monthly vs lumpsum) X X     X X   Kenya Unconditional (Weekly vs transfer lumpsum) X X X X X X X Rwanda Give Directly (Monthly vs and Catholic lumpsum) Relief   X     X X   Sources: Banerjee et al. 2020; Bastagli, Hagen-Zanker, and Sturge 2016; Caridad Araujo and Macours 2021; Copeland et al. 2022; Daidone 2019; Jones and Marinescu 2022; McIntosh and Zeitlin 2021. Some studies address the interplay between size, duration as longer than 24 months (25 months to 20+ duration, and frequency of transfers, comparing impacts years across studies reviewed). Transfers received over an of high-value, one-time, lumpsum transfers with those extended period of time, such as throughout childhood or of intermittent, lower-value, predictable transfers over during someone’s lifetime, as in the case of universal basic several years. income experiments, are highlighted where mentioned in the text. In this review, the term “frequency” is used to describe one-time lumpsum, weekly, monthly, and Introduction quarterly transfers. This review examines the impact of the timing of cash Findings from before 2016 have shown that duration transfers both in terms of duration and frequency of affects the impact of cash transfers on household transfers, and at times in combination (where noted). outcomes, particularly in health and nutrition, education, consumption, food security, and sexual and reproductive For the purposes of this review, short duration is described health (Bastalgi, Hagen-Zanker, and Sturge 2016). Mixed as 24 months or less (typically 12-24 months) and long effects have been observed on labor and employment -3- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 outcomes. More-recent studies corroborate these earlier draw conclusions about the relative strengths and findings with additional observations on labor and weaknesses  of different frequencies alone (Bastalgi, employment. Hagen-Zanker, and Sturge 2016). Findings suggest that lumpsum transfers may have a slight advantage for policy Owing to the limited evidence explicitly testing the makers based on cost and ease of implementation. role of transfer frequency, this review is unable to Key Questions 1. How does timing of cash transfers affect household-level outcomes on health and nutrition, education, income, and productivity or labor? 2. Does longer duration always equal greater outcomes? Why or why not? 3. Are more-frequent disbursements better or worse? Why or why not? 4. How do other factors such as objectives, targeting, conditionality, transfer size, and cost influence the impact of varying transfer timing? 5. What is the most cost-effective duration or frequency for implementers to consider? 6. What are salient gaps in recent evidence on cash-transfer timing? 7. How might the available evidence on timing, including that on cost-effectiveness, influence program design and implementation of cash-transfer programs? Key Findings Although households benefit from receiving transfers, the evidence reviewed suggests that the frequency of transfers does not significantly affect health and nutrition Health, Nutrition, and Food Security outcomes. Only one study found a difference in physical health outcomes due to frequency of transfer; in Rwanda, Conditions related to frequency and duration of transfers households randomized to receive a one-time lumpsum have different impacts on health, nutrition, and food transfer were compared with those receiving a short- security. Evidence suggests that the effects of duration term transfer each month for 12 months (McIntosh may outweigh the effects of frequency of a transfer when and Zeitlin 2021).1 In measuring child health outcomes assessed based on health, nutrition, and food security (dietary diversity, anemia, height for age, weight for outcomes. age, mid-upper arm circumference), a small difference in 1 The study included an experimental arm and a choice arm; 65 percent of households chose lumpsum transfers when given the option between one-time and monthly transfers. -4- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 impact was found between one-time lumpsum transfers recipients in Mexico (Caridad Araujo and Macours and short-term monthly transfers, with a slight advantage 2021) showed that long-term monthly transfers received for lumpsum transfers in weight-for-age and mid-upper beginning in the first 1,000 days of a child’s life had a arm circumference z-scores and for short-term transfers in greater effect on child health than transfers received only height-for-age z-scores.2 during the transition from primary to secondary school. These results echo earlier impact evaluations of the In comparison, in Kenya, no difference was found program, which similarly found better health outcomes between transfer frequencies for health, measured as associated with timing during the first 1,000 days (and an index capturing morbidities, under-five mortality, longer duration than the 1000 days) of children receiving newborn vaccination, health-seeking behaviors, and transfers, such as fewer illnesses, lower prevalence of child anthropometrics (Haushofer and Shapiro 2016). In anemia, and greater height of children. Frequency of the same program, the short-term impacts of monthly transfer was not compared because all transfers are and one-time lumpsum transfers nine months after the received monthly, so the primary variable was duration. program started demonstrated that food security was a modest 0.26 standard deviations greater with monthly A few studies addressed timing by comparing duration payments than with lumpsum payments (Haushofer and and frequency of transfers. For example, an assessment of Shapiro 2016), but three years after the program began, the impact of a universal basic income program in Kenya there were no significant differences between households before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, found that receiving monthly transfers and those receiving lumpsum long-term transfers, received throughout the pandemic transfers (Haushofer and Shapiro 2018). Similarly, a for two years out of a planned 12-year horizon, had a related study comparing weekly with monthly transfers, greater impact on food security and health indicators3 also in Kenya, found no difference in measures of than short-term transfers (two years fixed) or one-time nutrition or food security (Haushofer, Mudida, and lumpsum transfers (Banerjee et al. 2020). Although all Shapiro 2020). In Nigeria, the Feed the Future Nigeria forms of transfers reduced hunger for all households, Livelihoods Project also found no difference in effects of incidence of hunger in households that received monthly and quarterly payments on food consumption, long-term universal basic income transfers decreased the dietary diversity, and food security, although cash transfer most substantially (from 68 percent to 57 percent). This recipients consumed 25 percent more than non-recipients was twice the effect size of the short-term two-year only and had significantly greater food security and dietary and one-time lumpsum transfers. Universal basic income diversity (Bastian, Goldstein, and Papineni 2017). transfers also reduced the intensity of hunger (a family member going without meals for a full day). Because all By contrast, a variety of health, nutrition, and food households had received two years of transfers at the security impacts such as hunger, physical health, and start of the pandemic, the primary difference between children’s cognitive development, as well as impacts on short- and long-term recipient households was that the mental health, have been demonstrated based on transfer latter anticipated 10 additional years of transfer to come. duration. These impact measures may be attributable to the predictability of transfers and ability of households Therefore, recent research concurs with studies before to plan for the future. For example, a longitudinal study 2016 that longer duration may allow households to plan of Oportunidades (Progresa) conditional cash transfer better for health needs and shocks, whereas frequency 2 HAZ: short-term monthly flow transfers generated a −0.002 treatment effect size, versus −0.095 for lumpsum payments. 3 Physical (sickness in the last 30 days with symptoms such as fever and nausea) and mental (measured using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale) health indicators were examined. -5- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 does not have a significant impact on outcomes. Similar findings in the United States highlight the mental Despite the observed benefits of greater frequency, as health benefits of longer-duration cash transfers. In a demonstrated in Rwanda, a one-time lump sum may be as program in which American Indian households below the effective and, incidentally, less costly to administer than federal poverty line received cash transfers throughout more-frequent monthly transfers. This may also have to do childhood, financed by local casino income, depression with the size of the transfer, because one-time lumpsum and anxiety were significantly lower in young adults who transfers tend to be higher in value than more-frequent had been exposed to the transfer longer during childhood monthly payments. Further research should be conducted (Copeland et al. 2022). These adults were exposed to on the difference of the impact of long-term and one-time transfers for 14 to 18 years—throughout childhood transfers on health outcomes. If validated, this may into adolescence.5 Although socioeconomic status was suggest that not only duration, but also sequencing of examined as a potential complicating factor, the positive transfers during crucial developmental periods can drive effect of longer exposure produced double the negative health outcomes, particularly in children. effect size of low socioeconomic status; both results were statistically significant. Mental Health and Psychosocial In Kenya, there were no differences for psychological well- Well-Being being, measured as an index, although one variable— cortisol levels—was significantly lower with one-time Literature before 2016 did not explore the mental health lumpsum transfers than with monthly transfers (Haushofer implications of cash transfers extensively as related to and Shapiro 2016). Cortisol levels, a measure of stress, the timing of a transfer (Bastalgi, Hagen-Zanker, and are typically a predictor of long-term health. Three years Sturge 2016). More recent studies have drawn corollaries later, although differences were found between recipients between mental health and psychosocial well-being, and nonrecipients (0.23 standard deviation lower stress), perception of poverty, deprivation, and even physical there were no differences in cortisol levels between health. the monthly and one-time lumpsum transfer recipients (Haushofer and Shapiro 2018). This suggests diminishing In Kenya, it was found that one-time lump-sum transfers, returns with time and a possibility that the initial size of short-term (two years only) and long-term (two years the one-time lumpsum transfer played a role in reducing received, 12 years anticipated) transfers all led to physical stress levels. In the Feed the Future Nigeria Livelihoods and mental health improvements (Banerjee et al. 2020).4 Project, psychological well-being also increased more in Reductions in the likelihood of ill family members in the recipients than nonrecipients, although this difference last 30 days ranged from 3.6 percent to 5.7 percent, with disappeared once transfers ended, and no difference no significant difference by transfer. While not significant, was detected between monthly and quarterly payments mental health improvements were more evident in the (Bastian, Goldstein, and Papineni 2017). A separate short-term and long-term transfers than the lump sum study of more-frequent payments in Kenya found little one-time transfer. Recipients had improved mental difference in effects on psychological well-being between wellbeing, lowered rates of depression and improved recipients of weekly and lumpsum transfers (Haushofer, feelings of security.  Mudida, and Shapiro 2020). 4 Illnesses gauged did not include COVID-19 infections, which were not robustly tracked at the time of the study in 2020. 5 Other potential factors include greater community cohesion in American Indian communities than in surrounding communities and higher rates of perceived despair in impoverished Appalachian communities. -6- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 Studies focusing on mental health and psychosocial well- those who received benefits once already in school being are relatively newer than those focusing on physical achieved 0.4 years more schooling than their peers by health. Further research is warranted, building on new age 18 to 20 and were 8 percent more likely to complete studies at the intersection of duration, frequency, and secondary school, 18  percent more likely to complete mental health. upper secondary school, and 67 percent more likely to complete tertiary education. Results were all stronger for women, underscoring the potential gender ramifications Education of investing in childhood development over an extended duration, in this case 10 years or longer. Children who In addition to health and nutrition outcomes, transfers— benefitted from longer transfer periods earned 15 percent especially conditional cash transfers—have been used higher annual labor income on average, as high as 25 to improve cognitive development and educational percent for women, and had greater geographic mobility attainment of children, including school enrollment. These for employment in cities in Mexico and the United States. cash transfers are often correlated with a developmental period to achieve specific results. Echoing previous studies, American Indian households receiving transfers during this review finds that exposure to cash transfers over a early childhood for longer than a decade had not only long time, synced with early childhood development, may better mental health, but also much better functional increase educational attainment and future education outcomes in adulthood than their non-Indian peers prospects for children. This is especially true if timed well, of similar socioeconomic status who did not receive such as to the first 1,000 days of a child’s life, school transfers (Copeland et al. 2022).6 Functional outcomes enrollment season, or fee collection periods. The effect studied included physical health, financial well-being, is most observable at the primary and secondary levels engagement in employment, and engagement in risky or but also affects university attendance. Only one study illegal activities. Greater engagement in employment and assessed education outcomes based on transfer frequency less engagement in risky or illegal activities were linked to in Kenya and found no difference between weekly and better education outcomes and future prospects. Effects lumpsum transfers (Haushofer, Mudida, and Shapiro on functional outcomes were largest for the youngest 2020). Timing of the transfer, for example during school cohort, who received transfers the longest—from age 12. enrollment or in the transition of school-aged girls from In Mexico, the Programa de Apoyo Alimentario, which primary to secondary education, may be more important provided cash and in-kind transfers for varying durations than frequency of payments. Further research is needed to students, likewise noted better test scores four to on frequency and education. 10 years later in students who received transfers before the age of two (Avitabile 2019).7 In evaluating the conditional transfer program, Oportunidades (formerly Progresa) in Mexico, it was found that children exposed to transfers for a longer Employment and Labor duration and during the first 1,000 days of their lives experienced educational and income benefits in As with size of cash transfers, it may be assumed that adulthood when interviewed at age 30 (Caridad Araujo duration would affect labor, with longer duration transfers and Marcours 2021). Children who were exposed earlier decreasing the number of hours worked, because of the (first 1,000 days) and longer (18 months more) than displacement effect of high-value, predictable, stable 6 It is surmised that, in addition to transfer payments, positive changes in other community investments such as improvement in local health care, education, and housing resources may also have contributed to outcomes. 7 According to the authors, limited sample size precluded precise comparison. -7- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 income. This review concurs with studies from before two out of an anticipated 12 years were more likely than 2016, which also found that long-term transfers do group received one-off to engage in commercial risk-taking not necessarily reduce working hours but rather affect activities, inadvertently increasing their sensitivity to large the type of labor that households engage in. As with shocks during the pandemic (Banerjee et al. 2020). These education, the limited studies assessing frequency found households were also significantly more likely to move from no difference in impact between lumpsum and more- wage work to their own nonagricultural enterprises (4.6-4.9 frequent transfers. There was no difference in impact on percent increase in new enterprises) with presumed higher labor outcomes between weekly and lumpsum transfers earning potential, although because their investments were in Kenya (Haushofer, Mudida, and Shapiro 2020) and greater, when businesses stalled during the pandemic, their no difference between monthly and lumpsum groups in losses were also greater than those receiving short-term labor or profits in the short or long term (Haushofer and transfers who invested less to begin with. Shapiro 2018). Longer duration may also increase the likelihood of A review of a universal basic income in Alaska financed by engaging in other potentially beneficial yet inherently statewide oil production found a negligible impact of the riskier livelihoods. This includes risking job migration, transfer on working hours (Jones and Marinescu 2022). as observed among Progresa households in Mexico A small increase was found in part-time employment (Caridad Araujo and Macours 2021). Therefore, in times due to a reduction in working hours, especially among of crisis or economic setback, long-term transfers that near-retirees, or an increase in part-time entrants to the relax inhibitions to investment may expose households to labor market. The study of households—which received potentially harmful market sensitivity. This is a double- an average of $3,900 per year over their lifetime—also edged sword of potential higher profits and greater risk. points to possible general equilibrium effects due to A related channel is the impact of long-term transfers on the transfer increasing consumption and, consequently, future employment and labor for children and functional labor demand. As cash is distributed, consumption levels outcomes such as financial well-being, as observed in rise, increasing demand for goods and jobs and thereby studies from the United States (Copeland et al. 2022) and rebalancing the effect of the cash in the local economy Mexico (Caridad Araujo and Macours 2021) measuring rather than decreasing working hours and employment.8 the effects of long-term transfers in childhood on adult earning potential. A review of cash transfer programs across sub-Saharan Africa found households moving away from agricultural Consumption, Savings, and wage labor as a result of receiving sustained, long-term cash transfers during a period of eligibility measured using Investment poverty-targeting criteria (Daidone et al. 2019).9 This suggests an evolution in labor patterns as households Studies of savings, investment, and labor outcomes opted for self-driven enterprises and own-farm agriculture based on frequency of transfer find largely no difference over wage labor. Households in Kenya receiving long-term between transfer frequency groups. Sufficient evidence universal basic income transfers monthly for two years or based on duration was not identified. 8 Further research is needed on inflationary impacts of large transfers over time on working hours—a hotly debated area of study because of the proliferation of cash transfers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additional research is also needed on tax-financed universal basic incomes because the potentially anomalous use of a natural resource as in Alaska to finance a transfer may present “dead weight” losses to the economy (Jones and Marinescu 2022). Combined, these could outweigh a general equilibrium effect and in turn decrease labor (working hours) among recipients. 9 Ghana and Zimbabwe did not follow this pattern because of market configurations. -8- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 Weekly transfers increased household revenue agricultural assets (Morton 2019). One primary reason significantly more than lumpsum transfers in Kenya, but for the difference in investing is probably related to no difference in impact was detected for asset holdings credit and savings constraints. Women set aside money (Haushofer, Mudida, and Shapiro 2020). In Rwanda, from the reliable monthly payments to save for larger small monthly transfers were used to reduce monthly assets through mascates, roving peddlers who sell debts, whereas lumpsum transfers were put toward furniture, appliances, and other household items and savings(McIntosh and Zeitlin 2021).10 In Nigeria, there offer flexible terms of credit. This is the only credit and was no difference in household assets or employment savings system available to recipients and is limited to between monthly and quarterly payment recipients specific goods that do not include income-generating (Bastian, Goldstein, and Papineni 2017). Quarterly assets. The lumpsum payment is 10 times as large as recipients initially owned more animals than monthly the per capita monthly income and is granted to fewer recipients, but this difference had dissipated by the than half of women who apply for the benefit, making second follow-up, indicating that monthly recipients were the timing and receipt of the payment unpredictable. As able to save enough to buy assets eventually, whereas such, the lumpsum payment is used as a savings device quarterly recipients possessed the liquidity immediately to purchase expensive assets. upon transfer receipt. Studies considering the impact of the frequency of More-significant differences in frequency of payments— cash transfers on total expenditure and consumption such as monthly versus lumpsum payments—may largely find no difference yet are ultimately inconclusive illuminate constraints on credit and savings that affect because of contradictory findings. In Kenya, monthly savings and investment outcomes. Although the value and lumpsum transfers had no difference in effect on of assets was higher for lumpsum transfer recipients in expenditures in the short or long term (Haushofer and Kenya in the short term (Haushofer and Shapiro 2016), Shapiro 2016; 2018). Likewise, in Nigeria, there was no no difference was detected between the transfer groups difference between monthly and quarterly payments three years later (Haushofer and Shapiro 2018). Purchases (Bastian, Goldstein, and Papineni 2017), although two of expensive assets such as metal roofs, which monthly studies had contradictory findings. In Kenya, one study recipients were 12 percentage points less likely to acquire, (Haushofer, Mudida, and Shapiro 2020) found that instead using the transfer for current consumption, drove weekly transfers significantly increased consumption, the initial difference. Thus, monthly recipient households whereas lumpsum transfers had a nonsignificant effect; in may be credit and savings constrained. Rwanda, lumpsum transfers, whether small or large, led to a greater increase in consumption assets than monthly Although it was not a quantitative impact evaluation, an transfers (McIntosh and Zeitlin 2021). Previous research ethnographic study in Brazil found that female transfer has found that consumption in low-income households recipients invested monthly and lumpsum payments peaks when a paycheck arrives and declines until the next differently; small monthly payments from the social paycheck (Aguila, Kapteyn, and Perez-Arce 2017). Given assistance program Bolsa Familia were used to buy this, more-frequent payments may facilitate consumption food, school supplies, and durable household assets, smoothing. From an implementation position, more- whereas lumpsum payments received from the Maternity frequent transfers are likely to be more costly in terms Wage program were invested in income-generating of fees and staff time than one-time lumpsum transfers. 10 Instead of increasing savings, small Gve Directly transfers led to a 77 percent pay-down of debt and an increase in the value of productive and consumption assets, by 26 percent and 35 percent, respectively. Thus far, then, the comparison between Gikuriro project and cash breaks down into two distinct dimensions of improvement, each of which has a different and entirely plausible pathway to long-term improvements: savings (Gikuriro) or debt reduction and asset investment (GiveDirectly). -9- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 Further research is needed comparing frequency alongside lumpsum transfers may increase gender equity. (See XYZ relative differing sizes of one-time lumpsum transfers and brief in this series for further insights into the impact of varying duration periods. (See XYZ brief in this series for transfer value.) further insights into the impact of transfer value.) Implementation Considerations Gender Equity and Empowerment Independently, each design factor has a different effect It is believed that the frequency and size of disbursements on the impact of a cash transfer on household welfare influence women’s ability to control cash and thus affect outcomes. For households in the bottom two quintiles of additional outcomes such as child-related expenditures, income (bottom 40 percent of the population according health, and production (Bastalgi, Hagen-Zanker, and to income), large, high-value transfers may have the Sturge 2016). The general assumption is that smaller, strongest impact on economic indicators such as income more-regular transfers may be easier for women to generation, asset accumulation, and savings, as well as conceal, whereas larger, less-frequent transfers are more on consumption and food security (See XYZ size/value visible. These assumptions were the focus of a study in brief). Smaller, low-value transfers of less than 30 percent Nigeria (Bastian, Goldstein, and Papineni 2017) in which of annual household consumption may have a positive monthly or quarterly transfers were provided to women. nudging effect on child nutrition and education outcomes. Women’s ability to retain and control the cash was the By comparison, frequency does not have a notable same with the quarterly and monthly transfers. Transfers effect on any major household welfare outcomes unless increased household consumption, female employment, combined with the impacts of size, value, or duration, as and well-being, but the frequency of the transfer made demonstrated in this brief and elsewhere in the series. no difference in any impacts observed. Only one study specifically examined intimate partner violence as an Size, frequency, and duration can interplay to affect outcome in Kenya and found no difference between outcomes. In Rwanda, a one-time transfer or one year weekly and lumpsum transfers (Haushofer, Mudida, and of large monthly transfers significantly affected not Shapiro 2020). only consumption and assets, but also diet and child anthropometric characteristics (0.2 standard deviations In Brazil, lump sums narrowed the gender asset gap in over control group) despite the very short length of time households (Morton 2019). After paying for household during which these were administered (McIntosh and expenditures, women used small monthly transfers Zeitlin 2021). Whereas smaller transfers were primarily to purchase assets, although choices were limited used to reduce monthly debt (77 percent paid down debt) to gendered norms about items that women should and increase productive (26 percent) and consumption own, such as household items, whereas men may own assets (35 percent), one-time transfers were used to expensive, income-generating assets such as livestock accumulate savings (109 percent increase). Recognizing and crops. When provided with a larger lumpsum transfer that the frequency of transfers would continue for a as a maternity benefit, women retained a substantial decade more (two years received, 12 years anticipated), portion after covering household expenditures. Lacking households in Kenya also adjusted their behavior access to a savings institution, they invested the money during COVID-19 despite receiving small transfers of in more-traditional agricultural, or “male”, assets. These just $22.50 per month (approximately $0.75 per day) findings suggest that, in some contexts, large11 one-time (Banerjee et al. 2020). 11 For the purpose of this series, this refers to high-value transfers of more than 30 percent of annual household consumption, as discussed in the brief on cash transfer values. - 10 - SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 As demonstrated in this brief, smaller cash transfers combination of short-term, low-value transfers with (less than 30 percent of annual consumption) given in a messaging or conditionalities or long-term, low-value predictable flow over a long time (more than 24 months) transfers during critical periods of childhood such as may reduce debt or improve health and nutrition the first 1,000 days or school enrollment. Information outcomes by providing consistent, reliable assistance that regarding fidelity of transfer delivery, such as frequent households can earmark. This makes it easier to address one-time payments, was too limited to draw conclusions frequently occurring expenditures such as paying down for this review. Only one study—using nonexperimental outstanding loans and purchasing nutritious food for methods—highlighted the predictability and reliability children daily which could give an advantage over a larger of payments, but this was more contextual than fidelity- lump sum that could be used for a larger investment such related. In Brazil, reliable, long-term, low-value monthly as in household durable goods or savings. Larger cash payments led traveling vendors to visit rural areas regularly transfers (greater than 30 percent of annual consumption) and offer flexible credit options, which enabled women given one time as a lump sum can immediately increase to commit to a savings plan (Morton 2019). Objective is savings and allow households to plan for future needs crucial in determining the best fit design. and shocks. Individual design features cannot be taken in isolation Emerging Insights when developing a fit-for-purpose cash transfer. From an implementation perspective, other things being equal, it Recent studies corroborate previous findings that, would be presumed that implementers should opt for the lumpsum, one-time cash-transfer payments can have lowest cost to administer. Based on the available evidence beneficial impacts, particularly on labor, investment, demonstrating relatively low variance in outcome impacts and income generation. Positive impacts can still be based on frequency, one-time lumpsum transfers may achieved if a transfer is sufficient in value, even if it is be more appealing to implementers than more-frequent received only once. Findings in this review largely align payments, such as monthly or weekly transfers, given with the assertion that payment frequency alone does not lower costs and greater ease of implementation. In typically drive outcomes. Therefore, policy makers and Nigeria (Bastian, Goldstein, and Papineni 2017), once implementers should consider one-time lumpsum transfers all the fixed and variable costs of delivery are accounted to be as effective as smaller, more-frequent transfers for, quarterly transfers cost half as much as monthly across a range of outcomes. Only two studies reported transfers to administer, with no notable difference in noteworthy differences—one in favor of lump sums over outcomes. In Rwanda, although lumpsum transfers had monthly transfers in affecting savings, consumption, and slight advantages over monthly transfers in savings, child health outcomes in Rwanda (McIntosh and Zeitlin consumption, and child health outcomes, there was 2021) and the other in favor of weekly transfers over lump no clear reason to incur the costs of monthly transfers sums in increasing consumption in Kenya (Haushofer, (McIntosh and Zeitlin 2021). Mudida, and Shapiro 2020)—both studies acknowledged the small size of the difference. Nevertheless, cost-effectiveness implies not only examining cost-benefit analysis, but also relative Duration may be more important for consistent low-value effectiveness of approach in terms of impact. Therefore, cash transfers when households need a steady income an investment designed to drive specific child health, flow,12 for example to supplement income for routine nutrition, or education outcomes might require a expenses such as child health and nutrition or education, 12 Low-value transfers refer to those of 30 percent or less of annual household consumption or income per capita for households earning the bottom 40 percent of income—the lowest two quintiles. - 11 - SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 or even in times of crisis. Policy makers and implementers examined concentrated on short-term duration of 24 may consider duration as a highly influential factor when months or less or long-term duration of 10 years or more combined with smaller, more frequent cash transfers, rather than on incremental periods in between. Further with an emphasis on poverty targeting. research would be merited on specific time periods of intervention between 24 months and 10 years, especially To illustrate, a household receiving a transfer intended when timed to a critical period. Salient gaps in studies to encourage better nutrition and diet for young children remain, including lack of large-scale studies of the impact may benefit from small transfers at predictable intervals of universal basic income on employment and labor and throughout the first 1,000 days of a child’s life, which on providing a transfer at a specific critical development may improve the child’s early development and long-term juncture versus continuously through childhood. cognitive development or increase their educational attainment or even employment and earnings. By Moreover, additional evidence is needed, particularly on contrast, if a transfer is designed to fortify businesses how various design factors influence the impact of transfer affected by a large covariate shock such as a pandemic, frequency across outcomes. For instance, further research a larger, one-time, lumpsum transfer may be less costly should be undertaken on interactions between recipient to implement and more likely to enable the household to gender and frequency based on desired outcomes, as invest, accumulate assets, or save. evidenced by the findings on intimate partner violence. Further research is also merited on education outcomes Although this set of recent studies on duration may be given the dearth of studies. Gaps also remain regarding limited, it supports previous findings and provides nuanced the timing and contextual factors implicit in outcomes, findings of the impacts on mental health and psychosocial such as agricultural seasons, gender norms, access to well-being, as well as employment and labor. Further financial and economic resources or opportunities, and research should be undertaken on the marginal impact access to credit and savings, that may determine when gains of a longer duration such as one year. Most studies and where different impacts occur. References Aguila, Emma, Arie Kapteyn, and Francisco Perez-Arce. 2017. “Consumption Smoothing and Frequency of Benefit Payments of Cash Transfer Programs.” American Economic Review 107 (5): 430-35. Avitabile, Ciro. 2019. “The Medium Term Impacts of Cash and In-Kind Food Transfers on Learning.” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/33055/WPS9086.pdf?sequence=4 Banerjee, Abhijit, Michael Faye, Alan Krueger, Paul Niehaus, and Tavneet Suri. 2020. “Effects of a Universal Basic Income during the Pandemic.” https://econweb.ucsd.edu/~pniehaus/papers/ubi_covid.pdf. Bastagli, Francesca, Jessica Hagen-Zanker, and Georgina Sturge. 2016. “Cash Transfers: What Does the Evidence Say?” ODI. https://odi.org​ /en/publications/cash-transfers-what-does-the-evidence-say-a-rigorous-review-of-impacts-and-the-role-of-design-and-implementation​ -features/. Bastian, Gautam, Markus Goldstein, and Sreelakshmi Papineni. 2017. “Are Cash Transfers Better Chunky or Smooth? Evidence from an Impact Evaluation of a Cash Transfer Program in Northern Nigeria.” Gender Innovation Lab Policy Brief 21, World Bank, Washington, DC. https:// openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/28434. Caridad Araujo, María, and Karen Macours. 2021. “Education, Income and Mobility: Experimental Impacts of Childhood Exposure to Progresa after 20 Years.” Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.18235/0003808. Copeland, William E., Guangyu Tong, Lauren Gaydosh, Sherika Hill, Jennifer Godwin, Lilly Shanahan, and Elizabeth Costello. 2022 “Twenty Year Outcomes of an Unconditional Cash Transfer.” SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4059228. - 12 - SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 Daidone, Silvio, Benjamin Davis, Sudhanshu Handa, and Paul Winters. 2019. “The Household and Individual-Level Productive Impacts of Cash Transfer Programs in Sub-Saharan Africa.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 101 (5). https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aay113. Haushofer, Johannes, and Jeremy Shapiro. 2018. “The Long-Term Impact of Unconditional Cash Transfers: Experimental Evidence from Kenya.” Busara Center for Behavioral Economics, Nairobi, Kenya. Haushofer, Johannes, and Jeremy Shapiro. 2016. “The Short-Term Impact of Unconditional Cash Transfers to the Poor: Experimental Evidence from Kenya.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 131 (4): 1973-2042. Haushofer, Johannes, Robert Mudida, and Jeremy P. Shapiro. 2020. “The Comparative Impact of Cash Transfers and a Psychotherapy Program on Psychological and Economic Well-Being.” Working Paper 28106, National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/papers​ /w28106 Jones, Damon, and Ioana Marinescu. 2022. “The Labor Market Impacts of Universal and Permanent Cash Transfers: Evidence from the Alaska Permanent Fund.” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy. 14 (2): 315-40. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20190299. McIntosh, Craig, and Andrew Zeitlin. 2021 “Cash versus Kind: Benchmarking a Child Nutrition Program against Unconditional Cash Transfers in Rwanda.” arXiv http://arxiv.org/abs/2106.00213. Morton, Gregory Duff. 2019. “The Power of Lump Sums: Using Maternity Payment Schedules to Reduce the Gender Asset Gap in Households Reached by Brazil’s Bolsa Família Conditional Cash Transfer.” World Development 113: 352-67. - 13 - SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 35 Evidence at Your Fingertips Series This note is part of thematic briefs in the series including: • Evidence Briefs on Cash Transfers: Overview and Ten Key Messages • Cash Transfer Size: How Much Is Enough? • Cash Transfer Payment Mechanisms: Do Outcomes Vary According to Payment Mechanism? • Cash Or In-Kind Transfers: Do Outcomes Vary According Transfer to Modality? • Can Safety Nets Reduce Gender-Based Violence? How? The series is launched with that aim that these be living documents. In that spirit, the team welcomes suggestions on materials and topics to be covered in the future series that can serve as useful, practical references for practitioners of social protection. The series is a joint initiative by Innovations for Poverty Action and the World Bank’s Social Protection and Jobs Global Practice comprising Nathanael Goldberg, Lauren Whitehead, Savanna Henderson, Ana Alatriste Tamayo, Julie Kedroske, Ugo Gentilini, Yuko Okamura, Mohamed Almenfi, Hrishikesh TMM  Iyengar, and Mia Blakstad. For any questions regarding this brief, please reach out to socialprotection@poverty-action.org and malmenfi@worldbank.org © 2024 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: +1 (202) 473 1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications: The World Bank Group 1818 H Street NW Washington, DC 20433, USA fax: +1 (202) 522 2625 e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Project XXXXX